+1!
This is a very good revision of previous proposals!
I really liked it!
Thank you, gitarmanchu!
Feature requests
-
- KVRist
- 45 posts since 15 Jan, 2014
Here is a basic idea of how it could look (please feel free to offer suggestions or improvements).
-
- KVRAF
- 1753 posts since 30 Nov, 2013
Projects in the picture I also really liked -
not difficult and productive!
Ideal for me would be the possibility of drag-and-drop scales between all master tracks (I'm a fanatic drag and drop =)))
Simple and effective (I do not adman)))!
Well, I suggest to create (similar saggestions chords) same for the scales - in accordance with the selected chords in all future master tracks for graduation exact matching chord!
Well .. and the menu or dialog for user scales !!!
Thank U!
PS And please in one main window without difficult search function!
not difficult and productive!
Ideal for me would be the possibility of drag-and-drop scales between all master tracks (I'm a fanatic drag and drop =)))
Simple and effective (I do not adman)))!
Well, I suggest to create (similar saggestions chords) same for the scales - in accordance with the selected chords in all future master tracks for graduation exact matching chord!
Well .. and the menu or dialog for user scales !!!
Thank U!
PS And please in one main window without difficult search function!
-
musicdevelopments musicdevelopments https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=223336 - KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 6014 posts since 9 Jan, 2010
Thank you, guitarmanchu for your input and the screenshot! 
The more people comment this idea, the better.
I agree, the master track is a singleton. But I think it should not confuse an expert user to handle 2 or 3 different master tracks. Your suggestion about the override hierarchy is very logical, but I fear it would make the program more complex.
There would be two different uses for multiple master tracks:
Function 1): exploring possible alternative tonal areas (as Atonal wrote). Listen to your composition with other scales and progressions without loosing your original master track. Experiment without relying on Undo or remembering the previous 'good' progression.
Function 2): possibility of using independent master tracks by tracks. E.g. Track 1 and Track 2 uses Master Track A, while Track 3 and Track 4 uses Master Track B
With your suggestion there would be only Function 2, but without the possibility to share the same master track by multiple tracks. Of course a 'copy master track' functionality could be added to copy the Guide Track of Track 3 to Track 4, but I am not sure if it is a good idea. If you change the Guide Track of Track 3, you will need to copy the changes to the Guide Track of Track 4 all the time to keep them in sync.
I have one problem with snapshots: they are static. If there are one primary, and 2-3 secondary master tracks, they are constantly updated if the song structure changes, e.g. when the length changes, line/verse added, removed, etc. Even if they are hidden. But if we have a few snapshots from the past, how can I apply them if they were saved when the composition was shorter?
So there are lots of questions
I am looking for a solution that is simple (simple to implement and simple to understand for the user).
Thanks,
Attila
The more people comment this idea, the better. I agree, the master track is a singleton. But I think it should not confuse an expert user to handle 2 or 3 different master tracks. Your suggestion about the override hierarchy is very logical, but I fear it would make the program more complex.
There would be two different uses for multiple master tracks:
Function 1): exploring possible alternative tonal areas (as Atonal wrote). Listen to your composition with other scales and progressions without loosing your original master track. Experiment without relying on Undo or remembering the previous 'good' progression.
Function 2): possibility of using independent master tracks by tracks. E.g. Track 1 and Track 2 uses Master Track A, while Track 3 and Track 4 uses Master Track B
With your suggestion there would be only Function 2, but without the possibility to share the same master track by multiple tracks. Of course a 'copy master track' functionality could be added to copy the Guide Track of Track 3 to Track 4, but I am not sure if it is a good idea. If you change the Guide Track of Track 3, you will need to copy the changes to the Guide Track of Track 4 all the time to keep them in sync.
I have one problem with snapshots: they are static. If there are one primary, and 2-3 secondary master tracks, they are constantly updated if the song structure changes, e.g. when the length changes, line/verse added, removed, etc. Even if they are hidden. But if we have a few snapshots from the past, how can I apply them if they were saved when the composition was shorter?
So there are lots of questions
I am looking for a solution that is simple (simple to implement and simple to understand for the user).Thanks,
Attila
-
- KVRist
- 35 posts since 21 Mar, 2011
A I agree that a master track is just that, a master track.
Could you imagine the mess if each section of an orchestra had it's own conductor reading from different arrangements or if each instrument in a band followed a different drummer and in a different key to other players?
I think Attila's valuable time and talent could be best utilised in other areas of user friendliness. Flicking between different or alternative 'takes" might be a feature at some point maybe using 'child' tracks maybe, though Such a feature though should be carefully thought out or it would indeed complicate what is now becoming an extremely user friendly app, despite the already steep learning curve.
Just my views.
Could you imagine the mess if each section of an orchestra had it's own conductor reading from different arrangements or if each instrument in a band followed a different drummer and in a different key to other players?
I think Attila's valuable time and talent could be best utilised in other areas of user friendliness. Flicking between different or alternative 'takes" might be a feature at some point maybe using 'child' tracks maybe, though Such a feature though should be carefully thought out or it would indeed complicate what is now becoming an extremely user friendly app, despite the already steep learning curve.
Just my views.
-
- KVRist
- 45 posts since 15 Jan, 2014
Yes, I agree. I think the idea of multiple master tracks would overly complicate the program and make it very difficult for novice users.
Attila, you may be correct that expert users may not have a problem with it, but if you want to earn more new users (and sell more copies of RapidComposer
), I would focus on making the program really intuitive for new users. I fear that multiple master tracks would be a step in the wrong direction.
Attila, you may be correct that expert users may not have a problem with it, but if you want to earn more new users (and sell more copies of RapidComposer
), I would focus on making the program really intuitive for new users. I fear that multiple master tracks would be a step in the wrong direction.-
- KVRist
- 45 posts since 15 Jan, 2014
As for the snapshots, my suggestion is for the snapshot to save the entire state of the composition. It would be a cleaner version of hitting "Save As", but without cluttering up a folder with different filenames of the same song. There would not be any partial snapshots. So if I add a line/verse and take a snapshot A, and then add another line/verse, and adjust the length, and take snapshot B, and then change the scale and take snapshot C, each snapshot would be representative of it's complete state. Loading Snapshot A would revert the entire song to that state, likewise with Snapshot B and C.
Therefore, it would be up to the user to save the appropriate snapshots and switch between them. So they can do as much or as little as they like - all they have to do is switch between snapshots.
Therefore, it would be up to the user to save the appropriate snapshots and switch between them. So they can do as much or as little as they like - all they have to do is switch between snapshots.
-
- KVRAF
- 1753 posts since 30 Nov, 2013
Hey there!
I believe that Attila rights to do several master tracks!
I want to use different tracks full-featured master track!
Probably should make the function additional master tracks optional! Switched on and off in the settings. If someone wants to work with one master track, please disable this function in settings and work easier!
Let the new features are for advanced users, so as not to frighten new users complexity of the program! !
Thank U!
I believe that Attila rights to do several master tracks!
I want to use different tracks full-featured master track!
Probably should make the function additional master tracks optional! Switched on and off in the settings. If someone wants to work with one master track, please disable this function in settings and work easier!
Let the new features are for advanced users, so as not to frighten new users complexity of the program! !
Thank U!
-
- KVRer
- 22 posts since 7 Mar, 2014
I also like the idea of the possibility of more than one master track that can be assigned to a track, if needed for the composition. The amount of artistic freedom would certainly increase (polymetric time signatures, polytonal ideas could be realized.)
-
- KVRist
- 89 posts since 22 Aug, 2010
Just my 5 cents for this discussion on possible "multiple master tracks" feature.
Personally I suppose the same scheme as mentioned above by Mr.Lulukom - simply by making this "special feature" optional (and switched off by default).
This way novice users wont have additional problems while learning various basic functions of RC, while advanced ones would get a really powerful addition to the rich composing arsenal of the program.
Personally I suppose the same scheme as mentioned above by Mr.Lulukom - simply by making this "special feature" optional (and switched off by default).
This way novice users wont have additional problems while learning various basic functions of RC, while advanced ones would get a really powerful addition to the rich composing arsenal of the program.
-
musicdevelopments musicdevelopments https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=223336
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 6014 posts since 9 Jan, 2010
Thank you all for your thoughts! Now I know how to do it right.
Attila
Attila
-
- KVRist
- 222 posts since 13 May, 2004
I gotta chime in here and say that I think this could really complicate the program, too. Especially for new users. I still haven't delved into the deep possibilities of RC and probably never will. I'm a pop/hook guy, so I like simple stuff.
I'm sure there could be ways to add multiple master tracks and make them less confusing, but I dunno, I think it's a difficult idea to implement... might steer away a lot of potential buyers.
I'm sure there could be ways to add multiple master tracks and make them less confusing, but I dunno, I think it's a difficult idea to implement... might steer away a lot of potential buyers.
-
- KVRAF
- 1753 posts since 30 Nov, 2013
Hi Attila!
Perhaps we ask too many new features))!
But I thought that maybe even add a "randomization of scales" in the master track? It is fashionable now and in the general having fun)))
with respect lulukom !
PS Why new users should be afraid of new advanced features, if they will not be the default, but only if we turn it in the settings?
Thank U!
Perhaps we ask too many new features))!
But I thought that maybe even add a "randomization of scales" in the master track? It is fashionable now and in the general having fun)))
with respect lulukom !
PS Why new users should be afraid of new advanced features, if they will not be the default, but only if we turn it in the settings?
Thank U!
-
- KVRist
- 35 posts since 21 Mar, 2011
Really, an abstract experimental idea as multiple master tracks have no bearing on wether a user is a beginner intermediate or advanced in music theory or music production on a DAW system.
It would just invite far more problems than any practical use it would have in the real world of music production, consider trying to inject such rules which then be expected to sync and comply to the host DAW master track when used as a plugin.
Snapshots are of no real use as they would have to named and saved, a function which already exists. Incremental project saves (cntrl +s in cubase) would be easier to implement and simple to use and recall as the increments can just be called back when needed, of course different master track settings could be part of those incremental saves as Child tracks would be the better way. But, as I've oft mentioned, other areas should be really consolidated and expanded before going off on completely new tangents which may or may not enhance the App in any way.
Using RC as a plugin is one area that can be improved and made more transparent to the benefit of all users, old and new, these things are far more important than such abstract and confusing ideas of multiple master tracks.
Further integration and control of VSTis would be far more beneficial as would be a redesign of the mixer with a view to allowing the use of midi and audio VST inserts giving RC a lot more potential as a stand alone production app. MIDI import and export and recall could be improved along with enhancements to automation and integration with external controllers that have been flourishing like spring flowers.
Consolidating existing code and laying the groundwork for the introduction to the HD Midi protocol which is almost reaching completion and release to developers, allowing the introduction of literally 1000's tracks and control channels. It will be here quite soon as the statement by the MMA at the recent NAMM show. it will be mind boggling! I wouldn't envy the soft engineers who will have to comply with it all or their products just won't work !
Windows 7 is officially discontinued on February 13th and windows 10 is ready to flood the market this spring along with the new generation of CPU and GPU. Everyone who purchases a new DAW and OS will expect their Apps to just work.
I'm sure Attila is quite aware of all the exciting things that are about to land on compu muso's desk in the next few months, along with all the bugs and issues that will bring with it. I'm sure he will also have his time at a premium with all the new technology, mostly available now.
I'm sure to that Attila has how own vision of where he wants to take the App which is now gaining ground, and getting acclaim.
I think the user ideas and features area of every DAW is really important but users submitting their ideas should be realistic, and achievable, aimed at improving existing features and bugs to the point update. Attila is extremely responsive to his user base on features and bug fixes (unlike other software houses) he should be cut some slack. He has visions of where he sees RC going and, I hope he doesn't tell us either, it's protective to his ideas and gives the users nice surprises when update to appear.
Established DAW house release a major update and new version over a two year cycle and are already working on three of them so they know what's coming out two years from now. They don't rush to include such huge new features and bug repairs in a two week cycle and this forum should expect it either.
If I was in Attila's shoes, I'd be looking at some of things is this post, consolidating and tightening up existing features, redesigning the GU, redesigning the mixer and introducing plugin inserts and sends and getting the App so visually appealing that he can attract so many new users which is essential.
Such things will not be easy and take time and that time should be allowed to him as has his own vision as well of which direction he wants to take RC in which I'm sure will include some really nice surprises for every one.
In such a project, there needs to be a business plan as well. So let's get supportive and help him get this App slick, smooth, stable visually appealing, user friendly and very appealing to the mass market, he deserves the success and it's in reach!
Once that goal has been reached, then some of the more abstract requests may be an option....?
It would just invite far more problems than any practical use it would have in the real world of music production, consider trying to inject such rules which then be expected to sync and comply to the host DAW master track when used as a plugin.
Snapshots are of no real use as they would have to named and saved, a function which already exists. Incremental project saves (cntrl +s in cubase) would be easier to implement and simple to use and recall as the increments can just be called back when needed, of course different master track settings could be part of those incremental saves as Child tracks would be the better way. But, as I've oft mentioned, other areas should be really consolidated and expanded before going off on completely new tangents which may or may not enhance the App in any way.
Using RC as a plugin is one area that can be improved and made more transparent to the benefit of all users, old and new, these things are far more important than such abstract and confusing ideas of multiple master tracks.
Further integration and control of VSTis would be far more beneficial as would be a redesign of the mixer with a view to allowing the use of midi and audio VST inserts giving RC a lot more potential as a stand alone production app. MIDI import and export and recall could be improved along with enhancements to automation and integration with external controllers that have been flourishing like spring flowers.
Consolidating existing code and laying the groundwork for the introduction to the HD Midi protocol which is almost reaching completion and release to developers, allowing the introduction of literally 1000's tracks and control channels. It will be here quite soon as the statement by the MMA at the recent NAMM show. it will be mind boggling! I wouldn't envy the soft engineers who will have to comply with it all or their products just won't work !
Windows 7 is officially discontinued on February 13th and windows 10 is ready to flood the market this spring along with the new generation of CPU and GPU. Everyone who purchases a new DAW and OS will expect their Apps to just work.
I'm sure Attila is quite aware of all the exciting things that are about to land on compu muso's desk in the next few months, along with all the bugs and issues that will bring with it. I'm sure he will also have his time at a premium with all the new technology, mostly available now.
I'm sure to that Attila has how own vision of where he wants to take the App which is now gaining ground, and getting acclaim.
I think the user ideas and features area of every DAW is really important but users submitting their ideas should be realistic, and achievable, aimed at improving existing features and bugs to the point update. Attila is extremely responsive to his user base on features and bug fixes (unlike other software houses) he should be cut some slack. He has visions of where he sees RC going and, I hope he doesn't tell us either, it's protective to his ideas and gives the users nice surprises when update to appear.
Established DAW house release a major update and new version over a two year cycle and are already working on three of them so they know what's coming out two years from now. They don't rush to include such huge new features and bug repairs in a two week cycle and this forum should expect it either.
If I was in Attila's shoes, I'd be looking at some of things is this post, consolidating and tightening up existing features, redesigning the GU, redesigning the mixer and introducing plugin inserts and sends and getting the App so visually appealing that he can attract so many new users which is essential.
Such things will not be easy and take time and that time should be allowed to him as has his own vision as well of which direction he wants to take RC in which I'm sure will include some really nice surprises for every one.
In such a project, there needs to be a business plan as well. So let's get supportive and help him get this App slick, smooth, stable visually appealing, user friendly and very appealing to the mass market, he deserves the success and it's in reach!
Once that goal has been reached, then some of the more abstract requests may be an option....?
-
- KVRer
- 22 posts since 7 Mar, 2014
Well, thinking of Rapidcomposer being a DAW may be a misconception here. It is a tool for computer aided composition and it does it very well imo.
The art is to make the programm usable for beginners but it should simultaneously have tools for handling complex tasks.
I as a composer see advantages for multiple master tracks, for example for more experimental jazz or orchestral music where tonality can get blurred or absent.
I don't want to claim that I would use these functions often but the idea of having the option is a comforting one.
The art is to make the programm usable for beginners but it should simultaneously have tools for handling complex tasks.
I as a composer see advantages for multiple master tracks, for example for more experimental jazz or orchestral music where tonality can get blurred or absent.
I don't want to claim that I would use these functions often but the idea of having the option is a comforting one.